Senior police praised undercover officer who lied to court about identity, papers at spycops inquiry show | UK news
Secret documents released at the public inquiry into spy cops have revealed that senior police officers praised an undercover police officer who lied to a court about his true identity during an investigation into environmental activists.
Jim Boyling, an undercover police officer, posed as an activist and testified under his fake ID when he was tried. He was prosecuted for public order offenses along with six other campaigners, but senior officers decided not to tell the court that he was actually a police spy.
His superiors authorized him to protect his false identity through legal action, later adding that he “should certainly be praised for his conduct in every court hearing.”
Later, when the fraud was revealed, the criminal convictions of the two activists were overturned.
The spy police inquiry heard that for decades senior officers had followed a deliberate policy of not revealing the true identities of undercover officers to the courts when they were prosecuted.
The inquiry, led by retired judge Sir John Mitting, continues to examine how many activists were wrongfully convicted.
One Internal police review completed in 2009 He said undercover officers in Scotland Yard’s undercover unit, the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), “misled the courts with the knowledge, approval and support of their management”.
The review concluded that the deceptive tactic undermined the activists’ rights to a fair trial and described it as “utterly unprofessional… and completely ‘departed’ from accepted practice.”
The spy police scandal involves 139 undercover officers who spied on tens of thousands of mainly left-wing campaigners in undercover operations that began in 1968 and lasted until at least 2010.
The investigation has so far found evidence that undercover officers concealed their true identities in at least 13 cases involving activists supporting causes such as anti-fascism, anti-apartheid and animal rights between 1970 and 1998. The cases mostly concerned public order crimes.
The inquiry’s lead lawyer, David Barr, said: “He appears to have undermined the security of the SDS operation and above his duty to the court and the rule of law.”
Senior police officers believed that if the true identities of undercover police officers were revealed in court, their mission would inevitably be interrupted. This would also lead to public controversy that would jeopardize the unit’s existence.
They also believed that prosecution increased their spies’ credibility among the activists they infiltrated.
This week the inquiry heard evidence from Boyling, who infiltrated environmental and animal rights activists between 1995 and 2000.
In 1996, he was arrested using a fake ID while attending an environmental demonstration at Transport for London offices.
SDS’s executives told him to maintain his false persona throughout the legal proceedings.
In 1997, he testified under false identity while he and activists were tried for three days in the magistrates’ court for crimes against public order. The magistrate was not told that he was undercover.
Barr asked him: “Has consideration been given to the impact of the court not knowing that you are, in fact, an undercover police officer?” Boyling responded: “No.”
Boyling and the activists were acquitted. Following the hearing, SDS chief DCI Keith Edmondson wrote in a note: “DC Boyling’s operation has been strengthened by his involvement in this case, particularly in terms of his attitude towards ‘the authorities’. He should certainly be praised for his conduct at every court hearing.”
Barr said the memo suggested Edmondson “had no reservations about one of his undercover police officers testifying under a false identity at a hearing with co-defendants.” Is this fair?” Boyling’s answer was “Yes.”
Edmondson had previously said: “We did not think he would mislead the court by coming forward with that identity.”
Supt Eric Docker, a more senior officer overseeing the SDS, sent a memo up the chain of command reporting the “most satisfactory outcome”, which “once again highlights the professionalism and dedication of our SDS officers”.
After Boyling was revealed to be an undercover police officer in 2011, the convictions of two activists convicted of related crimes during the protest were overturned.
